HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Visnovsky trying to void trade to Isles - UPDATE: More Drama (post #510)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-27-2012, 02:32 AM
  #276
cjdv16
Registered User
 
cjdv16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Swamp
Country: United States
Posts: 6,063
vCash: 500
Any chance that the Isles get pulled into discussions and the end result is Viz ends up a member of NYI, but keeps his NTC in tact, limited where Snow can potentially deal him?

cjdv16 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 04:53 AM
  #277
Mr Wentworth
Arch Duke of Raleigh
 
Mr Wentworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjdv16 View Post
Any chance that the Isles get pulled into discussions and the end result is Viz ends up a member of NYI, but keeps his NTC in tact, limited where Snow can potentially deal him?
There is a high chance that will be the outcome of all this.

Mr Wentworth is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 07:53 AM
  #278
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,230
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAPPY13 View Post
Its the job of the GM to know whats in a player contract! If NHL rules Visnovsky is not an Islander shame on Snow. At the same time if Snow looked at the contract and knows Visnovsky does not have a no trade clause than you got to say for a 2nd round pick its a great trade for the Islanders.
I think one can blame Snow for not improving his team. However, I think it's much more reasonable to assume that Snow knew about the impending controversy. Why?

- The cost for Visnovsky was low. Hard to believe that other teams, like the Red Wings, wouldn't have wanted to be in on this. Reasonable speculation: The Isles were willing to take the risk the deal got voided, while contending teams were not.

- The pick was a 2013 pick. I thought it odd for a pre-draft trade to involve a 2013 pick. Inference: Negotiations had started when the controversy over a possible NTC came up. So the pick was moved to a 2013, problem solved.

- The Isles didn't peep after the grievance was filed. Snow is secretive, arrogant, and a bit of a crony. But he's not stupid. This is the sort of behavior I'd expect out of a wannabe Belichick who knew this trade could be voided. He got annoyed with people having the 'perception' that Visnovsky didn't want to play here. I bet he knew about the contractual issue.

cdv16 and Crazy Ivan seem to be right about this. I think Visnovsky has an interest in maintaining leverage. I think this trade will be voided, then sent through with Visnovsky's blessing assuming he will retain a limited NTC.

The proper criticism of Snow, I think, is that if this fails, he's going to get caught with his pants down. Which would not be a surprise. We've gone into the season with s***** D's every year of his tenure.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
07-27-2012, 06:44 PM
  #279
mitchy22
Registered User
 
mitchy22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,769
vCash: 500
If Visnovsky truly put the Islanders on his potential list of teams, I really don't see there being many probable scenarios where he doesn't end up on the team after the arbitration.

I also don't think the language in the CBA is strong at all for Visnovsky's case. I have no idea how the clause was worded in his contract though. At least if we could see that, then we could at least make our own case with all of the proper information.

As far as I'm concerned, it's much more likely he ends up on the Islanders than any scenario where he would not. This is based on what's been quoted by Vis and his agent and having read all of the relevant information in the CBA and interpreted it according to how a 3rd party should.

For whatever it's worth, I find a lot of things being discussed in this thread not even remotely worth talking about.

...too much drama and not enough substance to warrant it. Find my previous post in this thread for actual quotes and a link to the relevant parts of the CBA being discussed.

I'll even go that extra mile:
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...3&postcount=24 (Individual post.)
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...php?p=52977123 (Thread it was in.)


,
Mitch

mitchy22 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 03:06 AM
  #280
IslesNorway
Registered User
 
IslesNorway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Norway
Posts: 2,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ichabod13 View Post
some around here probably blame bad weather on long island on garth. ITS ALL GARTHS FAULT WE GOT 14" OF SNOW YESTERDAY......DAMN HIM.....DAMN HIM TOO HELL!!!!!!!

what? bossy has to retire due to chronic back pain???? DAMN YOU GARTH......ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!!!!!!!

if i could only find a way to blame 4+ years of being unemployed on him............
It's Wang's fault for not hiring you

Seriously though, hope you get a job soon.

IslesNorway is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 05:47 AM
  #281
GilliesGirlie
Registered User
 
GilliesGirlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: former Long Islander
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 6,068
vCash: 500
When is the hearing?

GilliesGirlie is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 09:46 AM
  #282
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isle Junkie View Post
for real. We're a good 10-13 points shy of being mediocre.
The Islanders were three points shy of NHL .500, I think that qualifies as being mediocre. 13 more points would have had them in the PO's..... but keep looking out for that falling sky.

Jester9881 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:02 AM
  #283
Noreaster96
Registered User
 
Noreaster96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
I think one can blame Snow for not improving his team. However, I think it's much more reasonable to assume that Snow knew about the impending controversy. Why?

- The cost for Visnovsky was low. Hard to believe that other teams, like the Red Wings, wouldn't have wanted to be in on this. Reasonable speculation: The Isles were willing to take the risk the deal got voided, while contending teams were not.

- The pick was a 2013 pick. I thought it odd for a pre-draft trade to involve a 2013 pick. Inference: Negotiations had started when the controversy over a possible NTC came up. So the pick was moved to a 2013, problem solved.

- The Isles didn't peep after the grievance was filed. Snow is secretive, arrogant, and a bit of a crony. But he's not stupid. This is the sort of behavior I'd expect out of a wannabe Belichick who knew this trade could be voided. He got annoyed with people having the 'perception' that Visnovsky didn't want to play here. I bet he knew about the contractual issue.

cdv16 and Crazy Ivan seem to be right about this. I think Visnovsky has an interest in maintaining leverage. I think this trade will be voided, then sent through with Visnovsky's blessing assuming he will retain a limited NTC.

The proper criticism of Snow, I think, is that if this fails, he's going to get caught with his pants down. Which would not be a surprise. We've gone into the season with s***** D's every year of his tenure.

Cheers,

Dan-o
That's an awful lot of assuming. If he legitimately had a NTC kicking into effect the next day his value would have dropped even further making a 2nd round pick (that would in all likelihood have been lower than the one the isles gave up) a good deal. Not saying that's why the price was low, but it could certainly be one explanation

Noreaster96 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 10:57 AM
  #284
A Pointed Stick
Spend? Of Course!
 
A Pointed Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
The Islanders were three points shy of NHL .500, I think that qualifies as being mediocre. 13 more points would have had them in the PO's..... but keep looking out for that falling sky.
.500 statistically or the skewed .500 based on OTL points? Reality still has us in the top 5 picks on draft day. 5 out of 30 is still a bottom feeder - not mediocre.

A Pointed Stick is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 11:21 AM
  #285
ScaredStreit
Registered User
 
ScaredStreit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 4,598
vCash: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
The Islanders were three points shy of NHL .500, I think that qualifies as being mediocre. 13 more points would have had them in the PO's..... but keep looking out for that falling sky.
There's the myth right there, that .500 is "mediocre" in the NHL. It's not. If the Isles were mediocre they would have finished in 12th place. (Hurricanes were 33-33-16 and finished in 12th). Our expectations and standards are so low-because this franchise has sucked so long. You know what team is "mediocre", or "average"? The 8th seed. When there's 15 teams in the conference the most average/mediocre one is logically the team that finishes in 8th place. Our expectations are so low that if we were average (after 5 years of being in the bottom five and "rebuilding"), that they would label it a success. Teams should make the playoffs roughly every other year (statistically).

Let's not forget that while they were 13 points from being mediocre (or making the POs as you put it), you're forgetting 1 crucial point: they would have to outperform every team from 8th-13th next season-not just the 8th seeded team. Next year the 92 points may not be enough to make the playoffs.

Lastly as far as the .500 stats, the Senators limped into the playoffs with a 41-31-10 record. No this team is NOT close to being "mediocre". That's not saying the sky is falling-or that they never will. It's called being realistic.

After the 2007 year regulars at the time to these boards said that the Islanders' lineup was better going into the next year (2008) than it was the previous. The few who said that was crazy was told the sky was falling. Well guess what? The sky did fall-5 years in a row.

ScaredStreit is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 11:23 AM
  #286
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pointed Stick View Post
.500 statistically or the skewed .500 based on OTL points? Reality still has us in the top 5 picks on draft day. 5 out of 30 is still a bottom feeder - not mediocre.
There is no skewed .500 based on otl points, only because teams can only win a maximum of 2 points. A team going 0-0-82 is the same as a team going 42-42-0. Although some see the first team as going .000 and the second as going .500.

Renbarg is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 11:39 AM
  #287
ScaredStreit
Registered User
 
ScaredStreit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 4,598
vCash: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
There is no skewed .500 based on otl points, only because teams can only win a maximum of 2 points. A team going 0-0-82 is the same as a team going 42-42-0. Although some see the first team as going .000 and the second as going .500.
In the NHL standings both teams would be equivalent-and that's what ultimately matters, not our individual views.

ScaredStreit is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 12:38 PM
  #288
A Pointed Stick
Spend? Of Course!
 
A Pointed Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
There is no skewed .500 based on otl points, only because teams can only win a maximum of 2 points. A team going 0-0-82 is the same as a team going 42-42-0. Although some see the first team as going .000 and the second as going .500.
Not true. Under the old rules where W=2, T=1, and L=0, half the teams in the league were at or above 82 points and half below more or less, with some skew up or down dependent on trends in the number of clubs winning vs. losing. The statistical average of all their points though came out to true 500, meaning add all their points up and divide by all of their games and number of teams and you'd get actual .500. Take the season of 88-89. 21 teams played 80 games and produced a total of 1680 pts in the standings. Divide 1680 by 21 teams and you get 80 pts per team, or 1 pt for every game played. That is true .500 by any definition.

Not so now. With teams getting 2 for the OT win, but the loser getting 1 point, it skews .500. Last season 30 teams playing 82 games produced 2760 points. Divide 2760 by 30 teams and you get 92 points which is a full 10 points above what true .500 would be, and all thanks to the loser point from the current system. Anyone saying that we were 3 points below 500 last season would be incorrect, as the league average was 92 points for the year, placing us a solid 13 points below the version of .500.

So no, .500 is no longer true .500, or what would allow us to be considered an average or mediocre team, but again if you go to the standings that is the proof in the pudding. Placing bottom 5 out of 30 means you are not a .500 team.

BTW, props to Scared Streit in post 285. That is it, exactly.


Last edited by A Pointed Stick: 07-28-2012 at 12:44 PM.
A Pointed Stick is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 02:07 PM
  #289
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,789
vCash: 500
All this .500 mediocre math mumbo jumbo is meaningless. Bottom line is in Bettman's NHL of parity where EVERY team has a shot, NYI haven't come close for 5 years and are out of the race by Thanksgiving. Pathetic.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 02:13 PM
  #290
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
And they were rebuilding those years, so....

Jester9881 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 03:33 PM
  #291
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pointed Stick View Post
.500 statistically or the skewed .500 based on OTL points? Reality still has us in the top 5 picks on draft day. 5 out of 30 is still a bottom feeder - not mediocre.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScaredStreit View Post
There's the myth right there, that .500 is "mediocre" in the NHL. It's not. If the Isles were mediocre they would have finished in 12th place. (Hurricanes were 33-33-16 and finished in 12th). Our expectations and standards are so low-because this franchise has sucked so long. You know what team is "mediocre", or "average"? The 8th seed. When there's 15 teams in the conference the most average/mediocre one is logically the team that finishes in 8th place. Our expectations are so low that if we were average (after 5 years of being in the bottom five and "rebuilding"), that they would label it a success. Teams should make the playoffs roughly every other year (statistically).

Let's not forget that while they were 13 points from being mediocre (or making the POs as you put it), you're forgetting 1 crucial point: they would have to outperform every team from 8th-13th next season-not just the 8th seeded team. Next year the 92 points may not be enough to make the playoffs.

Lastly as far as the .500 stats, the Senators limped into the playoffs with a 41-31-10 record. No this team is NOT close to being "mediocre". That's not saying the sky is falling-or that they never will. It's called being realistic.

After the 2007 year regulars at the time to these boards said that the Islanders' lineup was better going into the next year (2008) than it was the previous. The few who said that was crazy was told the sky was falling. Well guess what? The sky did fall-5 years in a row.
That's where our opinions differ. 92 points is a pretty damn good season..... we almost won the division in 02 with 96 points.

You're going by the record of the teams in 14th-15th, but that changes year to year. I'm going by 82 points in 82 games.... winning as much as losing on average. That, to me is the very definition of being mediocre.

Jester9881 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 03:48 PM
  #292
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
And they were rebuilding those years, so....
I suppose they were rebuilding the radio coverage, the ops department, the front office and amateur scouting too. Rebuilding is an excuse for not spending money. There's no rebuild.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 03:53 PM
  #293
A Pointed Stick
Spend? Of Course!
 
A Pointed Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
That's where our opinions differ. 92 points is a pretty damn good season..... we almost won the division in 02 with 96 points.

You're going by the record of the teams in 14th-15th, but that changes year to year. I'm going by 82 points in 82 games.... winning as much as losing on average. That, to me is the very definition of being mediocre.
92 Pts isn't pretty good, as it would have left a team out of the playoffs in the western conference. The only reason 92 looked somewhat good was because the East was weak that year so you could squeek in like Montreal did.

Also Jester, don't lose sight of what the topic was, which is that 79 points is pretty good or not. That's what the theme was, and 79 pts is garbage bottom feeder territory.

A Pointed Stick is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 05:02 PM
  #294
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pointed Stick View Post
92 Pts isn't pretty good, as it would have left a team out of the playoffs in the western conference. The only reason 92 looked somewhat good was because the East was weak that year so you could squeek in like Montreal did.

Also Jester, don't lose sight of what the topic was, which is that 79 points is pretty good or not. That's what the theme was, and 79 pts is garbage bottom feeder territory.
I'm not losing sight of anything. 79 points is almost NHL .500, and to me that is a middling team. For someone to say the Islanders need 92 points to be a middling team is exaggerating how bad they are IMO.

Yes, a WC team with 92 points was out of the PO's..... the Islanders also play in the toughest division in the NHL. This is all moot, as I've already pointed out that IMO a team that on average wins as much as it loses should be considered mediocre.

Jester9881 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 05:04 PM
  #295
Jester9881
Registered User
 
Jester9881's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 5,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
I suppose they were rebuilding the radio coverage, the ops department, the front office and amateur scouting too. Rebuilding is an excuse for not spending money. There's no rebuild.
What does any of this have to do with the post I quoted? If the Islanders aren't rebuilding, then what exactly are they doing?

Jester9881 is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 05:56 PM
  #296
19 in a row
Registered User
 
19 in a row's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
I suppose they were rebuilding the radio coverage, the ops department, the front office and amateur scouting too. Rebuilding is an excuse for not spending money. There's no rebuild.
So the team does not have a better farm system? Hypothetically if everyone they have now stays in the system, even if they don't go out and get free agents, won't they be better just based on homegrown talent than they have been? When all these guys mature you don't think there is talent to be a playoff team or a contender? Isn't the team the #2 rated farm system now? IMO this team has spent the last 4 years rebuilding from the ground up. It is a slow process in hockey when you have nothing and are a small market but this team has much more potential than what we had 3 years ago. From where I sit there is much more reason to be optimistic now than the last few years.


Last edited by 19 in a row: 07-28-2012 at 06:03 PM.
19 in a row is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 06:41 PM
  #297
IslesFanatic
**** you SnoWang
 
IslesFanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 12,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bert Marshall days View Post
I suppose they were rebuilding the radio coverage, the ops department, the front office and amateur scouting too. Rebuilding is an excuse for not spending money. There's no rebuild.
yup. its called being ****ing cheap. The Islesare not mediocre. The Isles are awful. This year's team as constructed is awful too.

IslesFanatic is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 06:51 PM
  #298
88th Precinct
Pitchfork Acquired
 
88th Precinct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Location
Country: Spain
Posts: 3,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19 in a row View Post
So the team does not have a better farm system? Hypothetically if everyone they have now stays in the system, even if they don't go out and get free agents, won't they be better just based on homegrown talent than they have been? When all these guys mature you don't think there is talent to be a playoff team or a contender? Isn't the team the #2 rated farm system now? IMO this team has spent the last 4 years rebuilding from the ground up. It is a slow process in hockey when you have nothing and are a small market but this team has much more potential than what we had 3 years ago. From where I sit there is much more reason to be optimistic now than the last few years.
If I were expecting the Stanley Cup next year, maybe I'd be ticked. Realistically, it's still an upward trend.

88th Precinct is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 07:34 PM
  #299
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester9881 View Post
What does any of this have to do with the post I quoted? If the Islanders aren't rebuilding, then what exactly are they doing?
Saving money.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Old
07-28-2012, 07:36 PM
  #300
Bert Marshall days
Registered User
 
Bert Marshall days's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 19 in a row View Post
So the team does not have a better farm system? Hypothetically if everyone they have now stays in the system, even if they don't go out and get free agents, won't they be better just based on homegrown talent than they have been? When all these guys mature you don't think there is talent to be a playoff team or a contender? Isn't the team the #2 rated farm system now? IMO this team has spent the last 4 years rebuilding from the ground up. It is a slow process in hockey when you have nothing and are a small market but this team has much more potential than what we had 3 years ago. From where I sit there is much more reason to be optimistic now than the last few years.
When you're rock bottom you can ONLY go up.....barely. Not spending is the priority nothing else.

Bert Marshall days is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:04 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.